[FEATURE] Function names

[csgillespie]

• What are you trying to do?

The function names have become a bit messy. We currently have:

• audit_deps() in v0.0.3
• audit_pkgs(), audit_renv_lock(), audit_req_txt() in the dev branch.

The issues are:

• audit_renv_lock() and audit_req_txt() do exactly what you would expect
• audit_pkgs() expects a vector of packages
• audit_deps() is really odd, as the deps are either all installed packages, or a tibble of passed packages

• What feature or behaviour is this required for?

It's confusing (well it confuses me)

• How could we solve this issue? (Not knowing is okay!)

Rename the functions! Now is the time to break/deprecate things ;) Here are some quick suggestions, please suggest improvements

• audit_renv_lock() and audit_req_txt() - look good
  • audit_proj() - this would scan an RStudio project for dependencies. For example, if an R package, it would read the DESCRIPTION file, and/or an env file
  • audit_installed_pkgs() - formally audit_deps()
  • audit_pkgs() - don't really like this name, but can't think of something better. Perhaps just a general audit()?

• Anything else?

cc @bhamail / @DarthHater / @brittanybelle / @adrianpowell / @csgillespie / @JosiahParry

[JosiahParry]

Thanks for raising this, Colin.

Regarding the name audit_deps(), I think this is misleading because it doesn't actually look at dependencies of packages but rather just searches for the package itself.

Disambiguating audit_deps() makes sense. I agree that audit_installed_pkgs() should be it's own function.

Regarding audit_pkgs(), what would you prefer to pass rather than a vector? I think accepting arguments as vectors provides the most flexibility.

Alternate name audit_libs()? audit() is also fine as it's generally a catch all.